May 3, 2022 03:41 PM
The failures of mathematical anti-evolutionism
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/05/th...lutionism/
INTRO: Mathematics has long had a place in the arsenal of anti-evolutionism, but in recent years it has become especially prominent. This is understandable because mathematics affords the possibility of an “in-principle” argument against evolution. If you can carry out a calculation to show that evolution is impossible or can appeal to an abstract mathematical principle that rules it out, then all the circumstantial evidence in the world will not save the theory. If the numbers do not add up, then the theory is wrong—regardless of any inferences you draw from paleontology, anatomy, genetics, embryology, and so on.
It is like representing a defendant at a criminal trial. One approach is to challenge each piece of evidence against your client individually in the hope of creating reasonable doubt. But a far better approach, if it is available, is to show that your client simply cannot be guilty. If he has an ironclad alibi or is just physically incapable of having committed the crime, then he is not guilty regardless of any evidence against him.
For the past fifteen years, the anti-evolutionist literature has been dominated by mathematical arguments, typically drawn from the fields of probability theory, information theory, and combinatorial search. These arguments are often presented with copious mathematical jargon and notation, which can make them difficult to parse for people not immersed in the relevant fields. By making liberal use of mathematical symbols, Greek letters, and subscripts, it is easy to create the illusion that something profound has been said. But when the arguments are shorn of their technical pretensions and presented in readily comprehensible language, it is never difficult to spot the fatal conceptual flaws at their core. Scientists are right to scoff at them, just as they rightly scoff at the anti-evolution arguments drawn from other branches of science.
What follows will provide a quick guide to the main themes of anti-evolutionary mathematics and explain in plain terms why these arguments fail... (MORE - details)
COVERED: Probability ..... Information and Combinatorial Search ..... The Futility of Anti-Evolutionary Mathematics
Misconceptions about vitamins
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/05/mi...-vitamins/
INTRO (Harriet Hall): In 1747, one of the first controlled clinical trials in the history of medical science involved vitamin C, though the researcher had no idea what a vitamin was; the vitamin wasn’t discovered until 1912. Scurvy, a disease caused by vitamin C deficiency, was rampant in the British Royal Navy, disabling and killing more sailors than combat, storms, shipwreck, and all other causes combined. James Lind compared these six proposed remedies:
Alas, poor Lind! He didn’t understand the significance of his experiment. He continued to believe scurvy was a digestive disease caused by blocked sweat glands.
Fast forward to the present: Vitamins are assumed to be some kind of miraculous panacea. People think they make us healthier, make us live longer, give us more energy, and prevent and reverse disease. Until 1935, food was the only source of vitamins, but today we can get them from pills, dietary supplements, and fortified foods.
How many people take vitamins? A 2019 Harris poll found that 86 percent of American adults take vitamins or supplements (American Osteopathic Association 2019); other estimates are lower but usually over half. Vitamins are commonly added to other supplements and untested alternative health mixtures, adding a veneer of health to unhealthy products. Many people take vitamins, but most of them are taking them for the wrong reasons and due to misunderstandings.
The book Vitamania: Our Obsessive Quest for Nutritional Perfection by Catherine Price explains our obsession with vitamins, which she argues are actually making us less healthy. She says, “We are such believers in vitamins’ goodness that we don’t realize just how much scientists still don’t understand about how vitamins work in our bodies, or how much of each we require.” (MORE - details)
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/05/th...lutionism/
INTRO: Mathematics has long had a place in the arsenal of anti-evolutionism, but in recent years it has become especially prominent. This is understandable because mathematics affords the possibility of an “in-principle” argument against evolution. If you can carry out a calculation to show that evolution is impossible or can appeal to an abstract mathematical principle that rules it out, then all the circumstantial evidence in the world will not save the theory. If the numbers do not add up, then the theory is wrong—regardless of any inferences you draw from paleontology, anatomy, genetics, embryology, and so on.
It is like representing a defendant at a criminal trial. One approach is to challenge each piece of evidence against your client individually in the hope of creating reasonable doubt. But a far better approach, if it is available, is to show that your client simply cannot be guilty. If he has an ironclad alibi or is just physically incapable of having committed the crime, then he is not guilty regardless of any evidence against him.
For the past fifteen years, the anti-evolutionist literature has been dominated by mathematical arguments, typically drawn from the fields of probability theory, information theory, and combinatorial search. These arguments are often presented with copious mathematical jargon and notation, which can make them difficult to parse for people not immersed in the relevant fields. By making liberal use of mathematical symbols, Greek letters, and subscripts, it is easy to create the illusion that something profound has been said. But when the arguments are shorn of their technical pretensions and presented in readily comprehensible language, it is never difficult to spot the fatal conceptual flaws at their core. Scientists are right to scoff at them, just as they rightly scoff at the anti-evolution arguments drawn from other branches of science.
What follows will provide a quick guide to the main themes of anti-evolutionary mathematics and explain in plain terms why these arguments fail... (MORE - details)
COVERED: Probability ..... Information and Combinatorial Search ..... The Futility of Anti-Evolutionary Mathematics
Misconceptions about vitamins
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/05/mi...-vitamins/
INTRO (Harriet Hall): In 1747, one of the first controlled clinical trials in the history of medical science involved vitamin C, though the researcher had no idea what a vitamin was; the vitamin wasn’t discovered until 1912. Scurvy, a disease caused by vitamin C deficiency, was rampant in the British Royal Navy, disabling and killing more sailors than combat, storms, shipwreck, and all other causes combined. James Lind compared these six proposed remedies:
- a quart of cider a day;
- 25 drops of elixir of vitriol three times a day;
- half a pint of seawater a day;
- a nutmeg-sized paste of garlic, mustard seed, horseradish, balsam of Peru, and gum myrrh three times a day;
- two spoonfuls of vinegar three times a day;
- two oranges and one lemon a day.
Alas, poor Lind! He didn’t understand the significance of his experiment. He continued to believe scurvy was a digestive disease caused by blocked sweat glands.
Fast forward to the present: Vitamins are assumed to be some kind of miraculous panacea. People think they make us healthier, make us live longer, give us more energy, and prevent and reverse disease. Until 1935, food was the only source of vitamins, but today we can get them from pills, dietary supplements, and fortified foods.
How many people take vitamins? A 2019 Harris poll found that 86 percent of American adults take vitamins or supplements (American Osteopathic Association 2019); other estimates are lower but usually over half. Vitamins are commonly added to other supplements and untested alternative health mixtures, adding a veneer of health to unhealthy products. Many people take vitamins, but most of them are taking them for the wrong reasons and due to misunderstandings.
The book Vitamania: Our Obsessive Quest for Nutritional Perfection by Catherine Price explains our obsession with vitamins, which she argues are actually making us less healthy. She says, “We are such believers in vitamins’ goodness that we don’t realize just how much scientists still don’t understand about how vitamins work in our bodies, or how much of each we require.” (MORE - details)
